Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City Public Transportation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts

What station is this?

[edit]

Location questions have been moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City Public Transportation/Unidentified locations.

ERA sources and JoeKorner references

[edit]

With the JoeKorner website dead for some years now, I was wondering if there is a seamless way to remove all links associated with the website from the articles that fall within the WikiProject’s scope. From the looks of it, the only thing I can think of is going through every single article and manually removing the links. I bring this up because we may be able to retrieve better sourced information from the many Electtic Railroaders’ Association (ERA) bulletins and periodicals that exist. I feel that the ERA bulletins is a much more reliable source than the JoeKorner website, as well as Eric B’s websites on line and subway car history. As much as those latter sites are/were a joy to railfans (I reckon some of us that contribute to Wikipedia are buffs), they aren’t reliable sources and it’s best that they are removed. While I don’t think most of our articles would qualify for featured article status, I would love some of our articles to fall within good article guidelines and be promoted to such a status. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 00:58, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At least 308 instances. From a technical standpoint, WP:JWB would be straightforward. If it's just an external link that's one thing, but it's often used as a reference (R29/R99 (New York City Subway car) for example) and probably shouldn't be removed without a replacement. An unreliable (if likely accurate) reference is better than no reference at all. Mackensen (talk) 02:11, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mackensen: Oh my, looks like I will have my work cut out for me. I'll see what I can do. I wonder if this would count as a suitable replacement for The JoeKorner website. I'm not sure if Facebook is deemed as a "reliable source", but it is from the New York Transit Museum page, so it would be better than the JoeKorner site. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 13:06, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A few references that I spot-checked are things like brochures from the MTA or predecessors. Those could be retained, but they would need to be linked directly through the Internet Archive. The rosters are a different matter. I don't know about linking to the New York Transit Museum's Facebook page; the question is how much weight to put on a social media post vs something a little more permanent. Mackensen (talk) 14:39, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mackensen:I have seen social media websites used as references in some articles. According to WP:RS:
Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as the following criteria are met:
The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim.
It does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities).
It does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject.
There is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity.
The Wikipedia article is not based primarily on such sources.
These requirements also apply to pages from social networking websites such as Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook. Use of self-sourced material should be minimal; the great majority of any article must be drawn from independent sources.
Therefore, I feel like it would be alright to source the NYTM page about the R29/99, but if we are able to find other acceptable sources, then by all means we can go with those. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 14:05, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another reference that is not a reliable is the Eric B railfan site, which Erichas stated he collected much of his information from ERA bulletins as well, but his website is borderline original research. Even if certain things were observed by him, as he is a railfan and MTA crew member, his site is still not a reliable source. I have removed the last of Eric’s references from the V train article about the line’s debut and replaced it with ERA bulletin articles. My goal here is to get more of our articles within our scope to good article status. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 00:33, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For anyone who doesn't already know, all of the ERA bulletins dating back to 1958 are available online. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:00, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NYCSubway.org photos as sources

[edit]

Does anyone know if photos uploaded to the nycsubway.org website are acceptable sources? I guess they can be used as long as unless there's some type of a source that is more creditable, but I have always had my reservations about photos from the website being used as a sole source of information. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 17:51, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My take is that they can be used as primary sources for basic information such as physical descriptions. However, they can't be used for any secondary analyses. If a reliable secondary source is available, that should be used instead. – Epicgenius (talk) 23:06, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Epicgenius Thanks Epicgenius. That being said, when using a photo (or photos) as a source of information, would it be alright if we added a description in the reference so people can have a better idea as to what is being referenced? Here's a example:[1] How does that look? —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 19:41, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
—LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 19:41, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'd prefer if they were listed in numerical order:[2] —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 19:51, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't even use them for something like this - the pictures establish that the cars were damaged at that point in time, but only the less-reliable description connects them to the specific accident. I occasionally use the photos to establish "X station had Y feature at Z time", but that's about as much as I would use them for. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:00, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pi.1415926535 In the R42 subway car article, the MTA press release and the ERA Bulletin cites the incident, with the latter giving the info about the car numbers involved in the accident. Here is the ERA Bulletin which references the incident and the car numbers involved, on page 20. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 20:50, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and made the change to the citation. If anyone has any qualms with it, I won't object to a reversion. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 23:31, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Car numbers 4730, 4731, 4624, 4625, 4818, 4819, 4786 and 4787 were involved in the bumper block accident:
    4730 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4731 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4624 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4625 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4818 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4819 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4786 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4787 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
  2. ^ Car numbers 4624, 4625, 4730, 4731, 4786 4787, 4818 and 4819 were involved in the bumper block accident:
    4624 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4625 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4730 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4731 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4786 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4787 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4818 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
    4819 Archived December 1, 2007, at the Wayback Machine

New maps

[edit]

The MTA has released new "maps" on their website which resembles the Vignelli diagrams from 1972. I have noticed that the diagrams have new service pattern time periods, with rush hour service now starting at 5 AM instead of 6:30, and overnight service is now between 11 PM and 5 AM. This means weekday and weekend daytime service is now between 5 AM and 11 PM, which also means evening service is now from 11 PM to 5 AM. Question is, do we update the this article to reflect this? —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 19:49, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Evergreen Avenue station draft

[edit]

I have submitted a draft of the Evergreen Avenue station. There are sources that indicated this station existed, and there's precedent for articles for elevated stations that no longer exist, such as Park Avenue. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 13:06, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LRG5784: In its current state, that doesn't meet WP:GNG. Mere proof of existence is not sufficient - there needs to be significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. The ERA's two recent volumes about the BMT elevateds would be a good place to start. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:24, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pi.1415926535:If that's the case, then the Park Avenue article should be deleted, as there are only two sources linked to the article about the existence of the station... *shrug* —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 17:35, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, that depends on whether significant coverage is available. Some stations have substantial coverage in newspapers, history books, etc. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:50, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pi.1415926535: Every station article within our scope started as a stub at one point. Whatever information we gather about a station we can add it to its corresponding article namesake as time goes on. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 20:01, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This also seems to be implying that every station currently part of the NYC subway - and many no longer part of it - received significant coverage; I don't think that's true. Perhaps there is another notability requirement that's being applied? Tduk (talk) 20:19, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Tduk: Given the amount of attention that the press has paid to the subway system, and the number of railfan/history publications about the system, I doubt that any current station would not pass GNG with flying colors. The number that have been brought to GA status seems to bear that out. (The handful of closed subway stations also seem well-documented.) The former elevated stations are more of a mixed bag, especially those like Evergreen Avenue that didn't survive into the public ownership era. Certainly we should not be creating any new articles without SIGCOV, as was done here. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree with Pi here. In general, virtually every subway station in operation today has received significant coverage, even relatively minor stations. The issue is with closed stations, which sometimes don't have any coverage other than passing mentions (and are poorly documented). Unfortunately, WP:NBUILD does not make an exception to the notability guideline for transit stations, but certainly some closed stations on the subway (e.g. City Hall IRT) have received significant coverage. – Epicgenius (talk) 23:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Really? For example, none of the sources on Fort Hamilton Parkway station (BMT Sea Beach Line) seem to be specifically about that station, they are only about things happening to the line and how it affects its varies stations; my understanding is that, as far as notability is enforced (reading over AfDs) a passing mention does not really count. What am I missing? Tduk (talk) 21:16, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. —LRG5784 (talk · contribs · email) 21:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help identifying rolling stock

[edit]

Hello,

A Seventh Avenue Express, c.1970s

I'm wondering if anyone can help in identifying this model of train - I believe it's a Redbird, possibly an R29???? Any help appreciated! Wikociewie (talk) 11:18, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_New_York_City_Public_Transportation&oldid=1286517138"